Java Development Team VS “Trendy Technologies” in Legacy Projects

Is your Java development team out of date after supporting legacy products for many years in a world of constantly evolving technologies?We must first understand what the legacy code is in order to fully answer the question.According to Wikipedia, legacy code is a source code that relates to a long-standing supported or manufactured operating system or other computer technology. This definition is not as clear as one might expect it to be.

In fact, these “relationships” or, in other words, dependencies often lead to corruption, failed features, short release and poorly timed market delivery. Or, if put more simply, operating in a product that contains legacy code will take longer than they need.As mentioned, the above events are frequent guests in legacy software projects, but “persistent” is not the same as “always”, meaning we are still left without a clear definition.

This is why our engineers designed our own, custom definitions for legacy code. It can be evaluated only after careful inspection and can be considered a pain or benefit.

So this Java VS. What now

Suppose you have a product with legacy code. And, at the same time, you are on your toes with new techniques. This will give rise to a paradox, where you want to implement new technology in your product, increase the speed of delivery for it, fix new issues and WhatsApp.

Is working with legacy code a better option?

The choice of whether new technologies would be a better fit for the product may not be based on new technologies, regardless of what they are capable of. This option should be based on the initial architecture of the product. If it was initially designed to be scalable to you – in theory – there would never be a need for new technology.

You may still like the look and feel of the new framework and programming languages, but your project will never be desperate for them.

There is and there is the fact that, like something, there is not a solid background for an ongoing business decision.

Working with legacy code would be a breeze, if it was initially designed correctly and can withstand massive loads and pressures today. The adoption of new features in scalable products, which resemble the micro service architecture, is putting more blocks on the Lego Tower.

Sadly, this is a rare case.

What usually happens for older projects is the fact that business owners are only hostages to their previous architecture options.

Java experts at QArea have noted a pattern – legacy code is usually neither static nor scalable. What we do here is we do detailed review, analysis, and structure data to show which areas of the product are flawed and how one can fix them.The impact of the review is always a hit like a truck. It is just plain painful that a project you have already put a small fortune into is useless and requires a total investment and if not over-investment.

Stick to java?
If, and only if, the product does not meet the expected standards of scalability and / or performance, it is time to change the legacy code. From here on, we have two modes of development – we can use Java or switch to a different technology altogether, given the fact that the entire architecture will be redesigned.

This option depends on you and your business goals, but we would still recommend staying with Java. It will be simple and inexpensive in the long run, and if used properly, the language is still quite scalable.The people of Oracle release new versions with updates or patches every year and two have no intention of stopping. This is one hell of a benefit of the Java language.

Choose Cluster!

After your decision is set in stone, a suitable architecture choice is important, regardless of the language or technology with which you want to create the product.Here, at QArea, we suggest the modular architecture as it brings a series of significant benefits. With this model, each element of functionality is treated as a separate cluster and all changes made within it will not affect the overall system.

We used this approach when developing our internal project management platform Timeguard, which allows transparent, data-driven team performance analysis for both our managers and customers.Cluster-size features provide another benefit – you can develop your project with multiple vendors at once. Our customers typically practice the 80/20 model when one team is developing core functionality and the other supports it with additional features.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *